What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

"Official" Donald Trump for President: Great Wall of Mexico (6 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Obama put a temporary ban on Iraqi refugees a couple years ago. Jimmy Carter did the same w/ Iranians.

I don't have any issue with a temporary ban on muslim immigrants.
Regarding Obama, he implemented a specific 6-month moratorium on refugees from a specific location only. It did not mention any religion. That is completely different from what Trump originally proposed.

Regarding Carter, he banned NON-REFUGEES from a specific location only, while continuing to allow MUSLIM REFUGEES to enter the country. Again, that is completely different from what Trump proposed.

 
Are we only banning people born Muslim and continue to practice Islam? What about people born another religion and then take up Islam? What about people born Muslim and then take up another religion? What about someone born Muslim, but considers themselves an Atheist? This is really confusing.

 
Nothing to do with being OK or not, but how does one tell if a person is a Muslim or a Jew or atheist?
Well yeah, but also kind of has to do with it being OK or not.  We've prioritized that whole free exercise of religion thing for quite a while now.  Put it all the way up at the top of the Bill of Rights and everything. And there are also policy reasons for a different tack here too, of course. ISIS wants a global war against Islam to help them win over moderates to their cause, and a nationality-based restriction doesn't help their narrative nearly as much as a religion-based restriction.

But I kind of feel like the fundamental principle on which the country was founded should probably be enough.

 
Are we only banning people born Muslim and continue to practice Islam? What about people born another religion and then take up Islam? What about people born Muslim and then take up another religion? What about someone born Muslim, but considers themselves an Atheist? This is really confusing.
It doesn't have to be. If they have brown skin and foreign sounding names (anywhere from the Middle East, India, Central Asia, Eastern, central, or southern  Europe, or Africa) keep them out. Only way to be safe. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Got an email from a local newspaper with the following questions. Best answers get featured in their upcoming story - relying on the FFA to give me some quality material:

What do you think of Donald Trump’s candidacy for president?

Do you think Trump would be a good or bad president? Why?

Are you afraid of the possibility of Trump becoming president? Why or why not?

Do you think too many people are taking Trump’s candidacy as a joke? Should people be taking it seriously?

What do you think are the chances of him being elected?

What do you think would happen if Trump took office?

Go.

 
Bigotry - intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
Ummm.  No.  intolerance towards attributes which are not opinions (race, ethnicity, gender orientation, etc.) is bigotry.

If I find your opinion stupid, that's not bigotry.  Your opinion is a choice.  Those other attributes are not choices.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Did Saint post this yet?  http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/03/29/secret-service-says-michelle-fields-touched-trump-before-lewandowski-intervened/

But speaking on condition of anonymity, a member of Trump’s Secret Service detail told DailyMail.com on Tuesday that Fields touched Trump twice – and was warned by agents to stop – before Lewandowski pulled her away.

‘She crossed in between agents and our protectee after being told not to,’ said the agent, who was present that night in Jupiter.
 
Ummm.  No.  intolerance towards attributes which are not opinions (race, ethnicity, gender orientation, etc.) is bigotry.

If I find your opinion stupid, that's not bigotry.  Your opinion is a choice.  Those other attributes are not choices.
:lmao:  I love it.  Do you publish your own dictionary too?  Google the word.

 
why is it OK to ban people based on country but not based on ideology?
Partially logistics.  Partially magnitude of the undertaking.  Partially because of longstanding methods of interaction on the international level.

It's always necessary to institute some kind of restrictions regarding some group of people coming into this country.  We don't let in people who have criminal histories, or people from certain countries, or people with certain diseases, or whatever.  The difficulty always arises when the undertaking is so massive or logistically impossible that it really just becomes a sham.  For instance, keeping out all Muslims.  

Muslims are over 20% of the population of the world.  Keeping out over a billion people is a ridiculous undertaking.  

Then there's the problem of divining a test.  Is X a Muslim? How can you tell?

Together, those two issues alone basically guarantee that we are going to be applying this policy with little to no ability to actually regulate our safety, even if "Muslims" were the problem.  Saudi Arabian princes and dignitaries will be allowed in.  Business leaders will be allowed to come in. Friends of the ruling party will be allowed in. There are just too many people to ban. And whatever the test is, it can easily be beaten unless you have some huge international registry of Muslims with DNA samples attached. Even then, what if someone converts away?

And, of course, having a registry of Muslims creates a new logistics problem, as well as the specter of our old German buddies and their tactics.

Basically, you can't possibly ban all Muslims, which just means we will be spending a lot of money and screwing up a lot of people's lives for no reason other than to #### with Muslims. That's why it's discriminatory, because it will have a big impact on one religion withoutany real corresponding interest being served for the U.S.

 
:lmao:  Only 9 pages and it's as if we never missed a beat after page 530 of the other Trump therad. Great job. :thumbup:

SaintsInDome2006 back at it collecting $ from some other campaign for each post he adds to the thread. Anti-Trump's working the racism and bigot angle. Trumpsters taking the highroad and not stooping to those low levels of the anti-Trumps.
You forgot to mention lemmings like you slobbering over Trumps every word.  :lol:  

L.O.D. stands for "Lemming of Drumpf. Way to go.  :thumbup:

 
Did Saint post this yet?  http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/03/29/secret-service-says-michelle-fields-touched-trump-before-lewandowski-intervened/

But speaking on condition of anonymity, a member of Trump’s Secret Service detail told DailyMail.com on Tuesday that Fields touched Trump twice – and was warned by agents to stop – before Lewandowski pulled her away.

‘She crossed in between agents and our protectee after being told not to,’ said the agent, who was present that night in Jupiter.
Yes I saw this earlier but did not post because I had zero faith in it.

 
Bradd Jaffy Verified account @BraddJaffy Mar 10https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/708167121063153665
In @KatyTurNBC interview, Trump repeats 4 times that Secret Service says no one saw Michelle Fields incident. What say you, @SecretService?
- Early March Donald said the Secret Service had zero knowledge or awareness and saw nothing.

- So: the day after the actual event Donald says that the Secret Service said nothing happened. Then no one in Donald's camp from Donald to Lewandowski to Pierson to Hicks or anyone mentions this. Then Lewandowski is arrested. Now same day the Daily Mail finds an agent who appears out of a corn field and says Fields was warned. - If you're not starting out suspicious then you're just forgetting all facts that came before this.

I'll be out :banned: but will check back in later.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes I saw this earlier but did not post because I had zero faith in it.

 
- Early March Donald said the Secret Service had zero knowledge or awareness and saw nothing.

- So: the day after the actual event Donald says that the Secret Service said nothing happened. Then no one in Donald's camp from Donald to Lewandowski to Pierson to Hicks or anyone mentions this. Then Lewandowski is arrested. Now same day the Daily Mail finds an agent who appears out of a corn field and says Fields was warned. - If you're not starting out suspicious then you're just forgetting all facts that came before this.

I'll be out :banned: but will check back in later.
I don't know, it's a pretty definitive statement from the Daily mail that they actually spoke with a member of the Secret Service directly.  They didn't say "reported from a source within the Trump campaign" or anything like that.  They specifically say they talked directly with a Secret Service agent.  This is firsthand information.

Of course it could all be made up, but why would the Daily Mail go out of its way to say something that is actually favorable to Trump if it wasn't true?  

 
‘‘The police in Jupiter, Florida, have clearly seen what Donald Trump refuses to acknowledge: his campaign manager battered a woman and caused serious bruising,’’ said Our Principles PAC leader Katie Packer. 

:lmao:  the drama here is off the charts lol

 
The best part is we have found a core group of folks with some common interests and the parallel running PM thread we have has strengthened some bonds around here. I don't want to speak for the group but it's kind of nice to roll in and see what's happening in the tree house between shifts
:lmao:   :lmao:   :lmao:  

This has to be the most pathetic post I have ever seen.The fact that you go out of your way to make sure everyone knows you have a simultaneously running private chat is all the proof anyone needs to prove you are fishing. Otherwise, you would just enjoy your private Trump chats without telling everyone. What you are doing is called trolling and it's really pathetic.

Nice try MOP.  :thumbup:

 
‘‘The police in Jupiter, Florida, have clearly seen what Donald Trump refuses to acknowledge: his campaign manager battered a woman and caused serious bruising,’’ said Our Principles PAC leader Katie Packer. 

:lmao:  the drama here is off the charts lol
All i keep picturing is rain man saying  ''squeezed and pulled and hurt my neck ... ''

 
It cracks me up that so many of Trump's supporters love him because they think he's so tough. And yet, again and again, he proves to be one of the biggest crybabies and liars I've ever seen. 

If this were elementary school, Trump would be the kid everyone laughs at and hates because he's constantly crying and wiping his snotty nose.

 
:lmao:   :lmao:   :lmao:  

This has to be the most pathetic post I have ever seen.The fact that you go out of your way to make sure everyone knows you have a simultaneously running private chat is all the proof anyone needs to prove you are fishing. Otherwise, you would just enjoy your private Trump chats without telling everyone. What you are doing is called trolling and it's really pathetic.

Nice try MOP.  :thumbup:
Not nearly as pathetic and you sitting there posting at the same time as Rubiobot on Google Chrome and as JuniorNB on IE 11. :lmao:  

 
I don't know, it's a pretty definitive statement from the Daily mail that they actually spoke with a member of the Secret Service directly.  They didn't say "reported from a source within the Trump campaign" or anything like that.  They specifically say they talked directly with a Secret Service agent.  This is firsthand information.

Of course it could all be made up, but why would the Daily Mail go out of its way to say something that is actually favorable to Trump if it wasn't true?  
Ok still out beering but I will take an intermission here.

As to why look at the author's Twitter feed, he's a Trump guy. Yesterday or so he flew to Milwaukee just so he could ask Cruz one question, whether he had ever cheated on his wife. 

And hey I have zero problem with anonymous sources, alt journalism or biased authors because we have adversarial press today. But let's say this is true. Ok so first of all the SS shouldn't be keeping press from candidates, that's not their job.  Secondly let's say they did tell Fields to back off, then why the hell is Lewandowski doing their job? The SS needs the campaign manager's help why? - More - Lewandowski claimed he did not even know who she was so he was lying then. Trump said it never happened, lie. Trump claimed the SS saw nothing, lie. Lie, lie, lie, but this - this - is the truth.

Finally look at the pics in the Mail. Donald claims he was touched. The pic shows them not touching. Donald claims there was a pen - ! - in the hands of a reporter - ! - a dainty 120 pound reporter from what has become a publication slavish to him and him only - ! - his life was endangered! Poor Donald may file charges himself for the illegal touching! Good lord. Even if all that is true, it's not a defense for Lewandowski, it has nothing to do with him using excessive force and jerking her back. The SS in the video show zero concern with her. There's no excuse for a fit 41 year old man handling a 28 year old woman that way. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actual Secret Service reaction: "OMG that cute girl is touching Mr. Trump! He hates that! And she's got a pen! You've got to stop her, Corey, get her!"

:rolleyes:

 
Ok still out beering but I will take an intermission here.

As to why look at the author's Twitter feed, he's a Trump guy. Yesterday or so he flew to Milwaukee just so he could ask Cruz one question, whether he had ever cheated on his wife. 

And hey I have zero problem with anonymous sources, alt journalism or biased authors because we have adversarial press today. But let's say this is true. Ok so first of all the SS shouldn't be keeping press from candidates, that's not their job.  Secondly let's say they did tell Fields to back off, then why the hell is Lewandowski doing their job? The SS needs the campaign manager's help why? - More - Lewandowski claimed he did not even know who she was so he was lying then. Trump said it never happened, lie. Trump claimed the SS saw nothing, lie. Lie, lie, lie, but this - this - is the truth.

Finally look at the pics in the Mail. Donald claims he was touched. The pic shows them not touching. Donald claims there was a pen - ! - in the hands of a reporter - ! - a dainty 120 pound reporter from what has become a publication slavish to him and him only - ! - his life was endangered! Poor Donald may file charges himself for the illegal touching! Good lord. Even if all that is true, it's not a defense for Lewandowski, it has nothing to do with him using excessive force and jerking her back. The SS in the video show zero concern with her. There's no excuse for a fit 41 year old man handling a 28 year old woman that way. 
The Daily Mail article citing the Secret service agent was written by a her - Nikki Scwabb.  And she's not exactly a Trump supporter.  She seems pretty even keeled.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actual Secret Service reaction: "OMG that cute girl is touching Mr. Trump! He hates that! And she's got a pen! You've got to stop her, Corey, get her!"

:rolleyes:
Right, what would Trump have to fear from such a harmless, level headed, reasonable woman like Michelle Fields?

 
Ok I will revisit that maybe i have the wrong guy. However - official Secret Service comment:

Guess.

https://mobile.twitter.com/seanmdav/status/714911994403557377

Whoever this source is he's not showing up to say anything.
Not surprising.  He won't say anything on the record at this point.  Not if he wants to remain employed.  But all bets are off if he's subpoenad.

Are we really going to criminal court over this?  Michelle Fields just destroyed her career.  :no:

And Lewandowski is a dirtbag.  That can't be said enough either.  Whole thing is a disaster.

 
its hard to take this post serious
No one's changing any minds here, I'm just registering my opinion.  It's baffling to me that so many people can get taken in by this self-promoting blowhard.  It's hilarious what he's done to the Republican party.

 
Who will be the first FBG to get Trump to retreat some ridiculous tweet as fact? We are counting on you for some high quality entertainment here. Go!

 
It is indeed, though I'd be horrified if I were an a Republican or a conservative

dang this new (to me) board software is weird

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top